[<prev] [next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <CAHp75VfVitVWoXbUs0gQbv9Ny2gwccON-+qU06YaCs19tF9oAw@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 30 Oct 2018 11:54:03 +0200
From: Andy Shevchenko <andy.shevchenko@...il.com>
To: peng.hao2@....com.cn
Cc: Rob Herring <robh+dt@...nel.org>,
Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@....com>,
Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de>,
Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>,
Andy Shevchenko <andy@...radead.org>,
Darren Hart <dvhart@...radead.org>,
Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Platform Driver <platform-driver-x86@...r.kernel.org>,
hutao@...fujitsu.com,
Linux Documentation List <linux-doc@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: Re: [PATCH V3 3/5] misc/pvpanic: add MMIO support
On Tue, Oct 30, 2018 at 5:08 AM <peng.hao2@....com.cn> wrote:
> >On Mon, Oct 29, 2018 at 12:54 PM <peng.hao2@....com.cn> wrote:
> >I would consider it as a bug if on some architectures iounmap() is not
> >able to take a base got from ioport_map().
> I added TYPE_PVPANIC_MMIO in QEMU to the architecture that does not support IOPORT.
> If some architectures does not support IOPORT, set TYPE_PVPANIC_MMIO in qemu. This setting is reflected in the kernel pvpanic driver
> and does not invoke ioport_map (calling ioremap). So I think the situation you described above will not happen.
> But I should resume one check like this to deal with the failure of ioremap/ioport_map.
> if (base)
> iounmap(base)
I'm a bit confused, how come that base == NULL when you about to call
iounmap()? Where you would like to put this check?
> The patch of QEMU is still in review.
--
With Best Regards,
Andy Shevchenko
Powered by blists - more mailing lists